A Forum for Vigorous Debate, Cornerstone of Democracy

***********************************************************************************************************************************
A FORUM FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND VIGOROUS DEBATE, CORNERSTONES OF DEMOCRACY
[For the journal (guidelines, focus, etc.), go to www.theamericandissident.org ].
Encouraged censorship and self-censorship seem to have become popular in America today. Those who censor others, not just self, tend to favor the term "moderate," as opposed to "censor" and "moderation" to "censorship." But that doesn't change what they do. They still act as Little Caesars or Big Brother protectors of the thin-skinned. Democracy, however, demands a tough populace, not so easily offended. On this blog, and to buck the trend of censorship, banning, and ostracizing, comments are NEVER "moderated." Rarely (almost NEVER) do the targets of these blog entries respond in an effort to defend themselves with cogent counter-argumentation. This blog is testimony to how little academics, poets, critics, newspaper editors, cartoonists, political hacks, cultural council apparatchiks, librarians et al appreciate VIGOROUS DEBATE, cornerstone of democracy. Clearly, far too many of them could likely prosper just fine in places like communist China and Cuba or Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Russia.

More P. Maudit cartoons (and essays) at Global Free Press: http://www.globalfreepress.org

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Victor S. Navasky





To the editors of Columbia Journalism Review,
Please consider publishing the satirical cartoon posted on The American Dissident website (www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=239569862679528067#editor/target=post;postID=6570831808058857053). Victor S. Navasky, one of your own, is its subject.
If successfully multiculti-indoctrinated, however, you are likely complicit in the subversion of Freedom of Speech in America and will, of course, not publish it. Will you at least contemplate why? Does the cartoon make any valid points? Does it serve democracy? Do you serve democracy or political correctness? Will you even respond? If not, ask yourself why not. As you can see, this letter has been cc'd to some of the faculty of Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. Likely, not one of those professors will express interest. It has been my experience that professors tend to be cowardly, herd creatures, unwilling to step forward as individuals, risking career to speak the "rude truth in all ways" (Emerson). Thank you for your attention.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Frank Bidart


Question:  Will just one poet staff member of the Academy of American Poets respond? 

Answer:  No.


From: todslone@hotmail.com
To: jbenka@poets.org; gcoletta@poets.org; adimitrov@poets.org; engleson@poets.org; aference@poets.org; agaleo@poets.org; mgannon@poets.org; pguzman@poets.org; slasner@poets.org; plegault@poets.org; bmerrell@poets.org; mnesmith@poets.org; rquigley@poets.org; ksugar@poets.org
CC: mediarelations@wellesley.edu; fbidart@wellesley.edu
Subject: Bidart Satirized: Open Letter to the Academy of American Poets
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 14:53:13 -0400


To Staff Member Poets of the Academy of American Poets (Jennifer Benka, Alex Dimitrov, Eric Engleson, Audrey Ference, Mary Gannon, Patricia Guzman, Stacy Lasner, Paul Legault, Billy Merrell, Meghan Nesmith, Gerard Coletta, Amber Galeo, Richard Quigley, Kate Sugar):


Please forward this email to the high-and-mighty Chancellors, since their emails are not available (i.e., Victor Hernández Cruz, Toi Derricotte, Mark Doty, Marilyn Hacker, Juan Felipe Herrera, Edward Hirsch, Jane Hirshfield, Marilyn Nelson, Naomi Shihab Nye, Ron Padgett, Marie Ponsot, Claudia Rankine, Arthur Sze, Anne Waldman, and C. D. Wright).


Might there actually be a freedom-of-expression proponent amongst you and/or the Chancellors today? Might one of you actually be capable of thinking and acting exterior to the group-think, established-order poesy box? Have things changed at all at the Academy of American Poets since it censored and banned me in 2007 from commenting on its forums, or is it still censorship and indifference to censorship as usual? Your likely silence will serve as a response to that question. If just one of you is curious, for further details regarding the censorship incident, including the transcript of the censored comments, consult http://www.theamericandissident.org/orgs/academy_american_poets.html.


For cartoons of former chancellors Bidart and Hejinian just posted today on my website, consult http://wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com/. This letter with your names will be posted under the Bidart cartoon. Thanks to the Internet, dissident poets like me do have a voice and freedom of speech scorning poets like most or ALL of you can still be publicly denounced. Finally, as Bukowski perceptibly wrote,“Poetry has long been an in-game, a snob game, a game of puzzles and incantations. It still is, and most of its practitioners operate comfortably as professors in our safe and stale universities.”

 

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Lyn Hejinian

 
 
Above is a sketch I did a while ago on Lyn Hejinian when she was a high-and-mighty censorship-favoring professor/chancellor of the Academy of American Poets.  For her rationale of censorship, regarding the Academy's censorship of my comments, as well as the censored transcript of my comments, examine http://www.theamericandissident.org/orgs/academy_american_poets.html.  A new guard exists today at the Academy.  And I am contacting each member of it to determine if perhaps one censorship-abhorring person got through the Academy cracks.  My next blog will contain the results of my poll.